CASA, Malfeasance and the Blame Game
Well Clinton, you are certainly a piece of work. You just astound me in what you say.
I have worked for a body [25 years], similar to CASA, charged with looking after and promoting an industry as well as performing a regulatory function. It is difficult to be able to do both functions, but possible to achieve, if there is a will to do so.
I think that is the issue - fee-for-service which has an entirely different focus to that of "regulator".
The seperation of functions certainly makes the process easier and fairer.
However, across the little [duuch] and big pond, both NZ and FAA seem to do the dual function better.
While we are looking at making reviews of decisions and examples of where the regulator "got it wrong" - take a re-visit of the Whyalla incident and the independent US Supreme Court findings.
It makes a very interesting read and the "take home" message certainly supports the assertions of many posts that CASA is not doing it's job very well at all
The 22 year review and the independent ICAO [poor card] certainly supports that view as well..
I read on with bated breath, if Clinton you would like to give us all your view of Whyalla and the ICAO report.